IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8834 of 2025 Decided on: 27th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jagdish Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1, 2 and 4. Mr. Rajesh Prakash, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Sikander Bhushan, learned Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Rajesh Prakash, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1, 2 & 4 and respondent No.3, respectively. 2. Petitioner is serving as Panchayat Secretary at Gram Panchayat Chhakoh, Development Block Sadar, District Bilaspur. His grievance is to the office order dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure P-3), whereunder, he has been 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 transferred to Gram Panchayat Kosariyan, Development Block Jhandutta against vacancy. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was posted at the present place on 18.04.2022. Though the petitioner has completed his normal tenure at the present place, but he is due for retirement within next 11 months. Petitioner under the impugned office order, has been transferred to a place, which is at a distance of 95 kilometers from his present place of posting and 85 kilometers from his native place. That the transfer has been effected on the basis of a D.O. note. He further submits that it is a single transfer and none else has been posted at petitioner’s place. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner has preferred a representation to respondent No.3 on 23.05.2025 (Annexure P-5) for redressal of his grievances occasioned under the impugned office order dated 22.05.2025. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case respondent No.3/ competent authority is directed to decide his aforesaid representation within a time bound schedule. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents are not averse to this prayer. 3 4. Taking into consideration the pleadings and aforesaid submissions, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.3/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 23.05.2025 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy within a period of two weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Till such time, operation of the impugned office order dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure P-3) shall remain stayed. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 27, 2025 Judge Mukesh